Historic, Archive Document Do not assume content reflects current scientific knowledge, policies, or practices. I I^HA United States UP}^ Department of Agriculture Forest Service Northeastern Research Station NE-INF-1 58-02 US D A M'L AGRIC LISRAiri' 2003 AUG I ^ iT SERIAL : Forest Health Monitoring in Pennsylvania 1998-1999 PENNSYLVANIA The National Forest Health Monitoring (FHM) program monitors the long- term status, changes and trends in the health of forest ecosystems and is conducted in cooperation with individual states. In Pennsylvania, 181 FHM plots were established in 1998 and about one- third of the plots were remeasured in 1999 (Fig. 1). Each point in Figure 1 represents the status and approximate locations of one FHM plot. Each plot is a set of four fixed-area circular plots. Most tree measurements are made on four 1/24-acre subplots. Seedling and sapling measurements are made on four 1/300-acre microplots, located within the subplots. This report summarizes the most recent conditions. Figure 1. - Current status approximate locations of Forest Health Monitoring (FHM) plots in Pennsylvania. Plot Characteristics O 84 of the 181 plots were at least partially forested. There was no data for 17 plots due to lack of access. O 42 percent of the 181 -plot area was forested. O 51 percent of the forested areas were of the maple-beech-birch forest types; the second most common group was the oak-hickory forest type, accounting for about 39 percent of the forested areas. O 69 percent of the forested areas were in sawtimber-size stands; 22 percent of the forested areas were in poletimber-size stands. O 65 percent of the forested areas were in stands that were more than 60 years old; 17 percent were in stands that were 41 to 60 years old, and 10 percent were in stands that were 21 to 40 years old. Plot Structure (Table 1) Seedlings O American beech seedlings (12 inches tall, less than 1 inch diameter) were most abundant, accounting for 18 percent of the 1 ,244 seedlings counted. O The five most abundant species groups collectively accounted for 66 percent of the seedlings. They were American beech, black cherry, red maple, other birch, and white and green ash. Saplings O Red maple saplings 1 to 4.9 inches diameter at breast height (d.b.h.) were the most abundant, accounting for 25 percent of the 266 saplings counted. O The five most abundant species groups collectively accounted for 63 percent of the saplings. They were red maple, other birch, black cherry, tupelo/blackgum, and American beech. Trees O Red maple trees (5 inches d.b.h. or greater) were the most abundant, accounting for 28 percent of the 1 ,977 trees counted. O The five most common species groups collectively accounted for 59 percent of the trees. They were red maple, black cherry, other (non- select) white oak, sugar maple, and select red oak. Table 1 . - Number of trees by size class, and species groups, Pennsylvania, 1998-99. Rankings of species quantity appear as superscripts beside numbers, Species oize uiass oeeaiings oapiings "T Trees vvriiie/yreGn dbn 1 o OD American oeecn no yj utner Dircn 1 o4 ^y 93 biacK cnerry i QQ 2 1 oy 216 ougar mapie Q i Ol o H or\ 4 Red maple 148' 68^ 560^ oeiecT reu oaK oy /I 4 i no ^ 1 uy Other white oak 24 1 161 ' Tupelo/Blackgum 15 22" 48 All softwoods 21 3 176 All hardwoods 1,223 263 1,801 All trees 1,244 266 1,977 Table 2. -- Mean plot values and percentage of trees with ratings of specified values, by crown variable, Pennsylvania, 1998-99. (Plot means based on 84 forested plots; percentage of trees based on 1 ,977 live trees 5 in. or more in d.b.h.) Value Crown Dieback Plot Mean 2.7% Trees with <5% dieback 94 Foliage Transparency Plot Mean 16.7% Trees with <30% transparency 99 Crown Density Plot Mean 49.1% Trees with >30% density 95 Tree Condition Crown Dieback (Table 2; Fig. 2) Crown dieback refers to recent mortality of branches with fine twigs and is measured as a percentage of the tree crown. Low dieback ratings (5 percent or less) are considered to be an indicator of good health. High dieback ratings indicate poor health. O 94 percent of the trees had low dieback ratings; average dieback was 3 percent. O Less than 1 percent of all trees had high dieback ratings (more than 20 percent affected crown). Select red oak Sugar maple Other white oak Black cherry Red maple All hardwoods All softwoods All trees ~~ni ZZH 20 40 60 80 Percentage of trees 100 □ 0-5% dieback 16-20% dieback ■ 21-50% dieback □ 51-100% dieback Figure 2.-Distribution of crown dieback ratings for trees In Pennsylvania, 1998-1999 Foliage Transparency (Table 2; Fig. 3) Foliage transparency is the amount of skylight visible through the live, normally foliated portion of the crown. Foliage transparency estimates the crown condition in relation to a typical tree for the site where it is found. Low transparency ratings (little visible skylight) indicate a full and generally healthy crown; high transparency ratings indicate a sparse crown. Transparency ratings of 30 percent or less are considered normal for most trees. O Virtually all of the trees had normal transparency ratings; average transparency was 1 7 percent. Select red oak | ^ Sugar maple i , ^ Other white oak i — u Black cherry I Red maple I ^ All hardwoods ^ lU All softwoods I j ^ , ' J All trees I ' , ^ | lU 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percentage of trees □ 0-30% transparency ■ 3 1-50% transparency □ 51-100% transparency Figure 3. - Distribution of foliage transparency ratings for trees in Pennsylvania, 1998-1999. Crown Density (Table 2; Fig. 4) Crown density is the percentage of crown area where sunlight is blocked by crown branches, foliage, and reproductive structures. Crown density estimates crown condition relative to a typical tree for the site. Density also serves as an indicator of future growth. High density ratings (greater than 30 percent) indicate a full, healthy, crown. O 95 percent of trees had high density ratings; average crown density was 49 percent. Select red oak Sugar maple Other white oak Black cherry Red maple All hardwoods All softwoods All trees 20 40 60 80 Percentage of trees 100 □ 51-100% density ■ 31-50% density □ 0-30% density Figure 4. - Distribution of crown density ratings for trees in Pennsylvania, 1998-1999. Tree Damage Signs and symptoms of damage were recorded if the damage could kill the tree or affect its long-term survival. The 1 1 categories of damage used in this report were: cankers and galls, decay, open wounds, resinosis and gummosis, cracks and seams, vines, dead or broken tops, broken branches, other bole and root damage, other crown damage, and other damage (not othenA/ise defined). O 81 percent of trees had no significant damage, 17 percent had one damage, and 2 percent of the trees had two or more damages. O 48 percent of 423 damages were decay; 14 percent were open wounds; and 8 percent were dead or broken branches. Cankers and galls, vines, and dead or broken tops each accounted for about 7 percent of the damages. O Decay was 69 percent of the damage on select red oak. Summary Based on the FHM plots, Pennsylvania has mature forests dominated by hardwood species. Red maple was common in all size classes. Most trees are healthy, with full crowns (low transparency, high density), little dieback, and little damage. For more information regarding the FHM program, contact: Chuck Barnett, Northeastern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 11 Campus Blvd, Suite 200, Newtown Square, PA 19073, 610-557-4031 , cjbarnett@fs.fed.us, or visit the National FHM website: www.na.fs.fed. us/spfo/fhm Acknowledgments The FHM program thanks the landowners of Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania Bureau of Forestry for their cooperation and assistance. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250 9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.